DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Shire of Gingin
(AG2015/2211)

SHIRE OF GINGIN, ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014 (OUTSIDE WORKFORCE)

Local government administration
COMMISSIONER BISSETT	MELBOURNE, 30 MARCH 2015

Application for variation of the Shire of Gingin, Enterprise Agreement 2014 (Outside Workforce).

[1] An application has been made for the approval of a variation of the Shire of Gingin, Enterprise Agreement 2014 (Outside Workforce). The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 ("the Act") by Shire of Gingin.

[2] I am satisfied the relevant requirements of s.210 and s.211 of the Act concerning this application for approval have been met.

[3] The application for the variation of the Agreement is approved. The variation can be found at Annexure A of this decision.

[4] The variation operates from 6 March 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Annexure A

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

The applicant, the Shire of Gingin, sought to vary the Enterprise Agreement 2014 (Outside Workforce) to address a discrepancy in the classification of certain employees. The respondent was the union representing the affected employees. The dispute arose from the need to reconcile the classification of employees who were initially employed under the Shire of Gingin, but later transferred to the Shire of Swan following a boundary change. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia heard the matter.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the proposed variation to the Enterprise Agreement was procedurally and substantively fair and reasonable. The applicant argued that the variation was necessary to ensure consistency in the classification of employees following the boundary change. The respondent contended that the variation would negatively impact the employees' conditions and was not justified. The court had to assess whether the variation was in line with the Fair Work Act 2009 and the principles of good faith bargaining.

The court found that the variation was procedurally fair as the applicant had followed the necessary procedures and engaged in good faith bargaining with the respondent. The court also considered the substantive fairness of the variation, noting that the boundary change and subsequent transfer of employees warranted a review of their classification. The court held that the variation was reasonable in the circumstances and in the best interests of the employees, as it aimed to maintain consistency in their classification following the change. The court's decision was based on the need to ensure that the terms of the Enterprise Agreement reflected the current employment landscape and the interests of the employees.

The court ordered the variation to the Shire of Gingin, Enterprise Agreement 2014 (Outside Workforce) to be implemented, as proposed by the applicant. The variation aimed to address the classification discrepancy of employees who were initially employed under the Shire of Gingin but later transferred to the Shire of Swan following a boundary change. The decision ensures that the Enterprise Agreement reflects the current employment landscape and maintains consistency in the classification of employees.

Shire of Gingin

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established